Little Younglin, I don't mean to undermine your point, but while it's true that the quality of a film CAN BE reflected by the awards it wins, there are other factors which don't make it a true test.

The period in time when the film came out, the quality of other films released during the same period, bias against subject matter (or the artists), political correctness, etc. can all keep a film from receiving awards that you could argue it deserves.

An example would be that a Star Wars film is much more likely to win the special effects award in a year when there aren't many other big budget f/x films around.

My thinking is that you can argue that a film is 'good' because it received a lot of awards, but you can't judge a film as 'bad' just because it didn't.

Using this list, it could be argued that the amount of oscars won by a picture is inversely proportional to the quality of the picture, so AotC must be the best SW film to date

All those films got a ton of nominations which is an honor in itself. AOTC one got nomination for Special Effects which it didn't win. The point of that post was to show that people didn't hate Star Wars back in the day as some people today claim.

the script contains virtually every cliche to be uttered in a war film or adventure epic; the actors -- especially Harrison Ford in a Chevy Chase-like performance -- add to the fun by delivering their lines in an off-handed way...

The rest of the review was positive...... but the comment on the script is pretty close to what we're hearing about the PT.

Here's a quote from Roger Ebert:

Star Wars'' effectively brought to an end the golden era of early-1970s personal filmmaking and focused the industry on big-budget special-effects blockbusters, blasting off a trend we are still living through.

He also says this about the films in a very positive review....

It's as goofy as a children's tale, as shallow as an old Saturday afternoon serial, as corny as Kansas in August--and a masterpiece.

The views of cliche dialogue is and always has been a criticism of the SW films......

"Amazing that someone can claim to be a true, die-hard fan of these movies and yet would state "Anakin and Luke are the same." They are NOTHING alike."

No one has the right to question my devotion to Star Wars. I've been obsessed with the adventures of Luke Skywalker since before many of you were a gleam in your daddy's eye. Does that make me more important, or make my opinions superior to anyone elses'? No, not at all. But I'm enough of an adult to recognize that there are all sorts of opinions out there, and to be respectful of every one of them.

Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't make me, or anyone else less of a fan.

Back on Topic

Don't try to throw out positive reviews to prove that Star Wars was well-liked back in the day. That's not what we're calling into question. Go back and read the reviews and see how many times they complain about the script, the acting, and the overblown special effects. That's what we're arguing here. That these same complaints have been thrown against Star Wars since the beginning. Even Carrie Fisher commented on this in a recent interview.

The point of that post was to show that people didn't hate Star Wars back in the day as some people today claim.

And mine was to show that listing awards has little if not zero meaning. I don't think people hated SW in the 70's and 80's. I think it suffered the 'Alfred Hitchcock syndrome': Given that your work is popular, it can't be considered as art.

Again, I think this little example can show you why adjusted BO is not a good way to measure quality. Maybe you could argue 'But these are not examples from the same franchise'. Let's take the Die Hard movies. I happen to think that the order in quality is 1-3-2, and I think that is the general consensus (feel free to tell me if I'm wrong), but adjusted BO tells me 2-3-1, just in reverse [face_shocked] .

Nobody is saying that the films aren't popular..... they obvioulsy are....

The point is that critics disliked the OT during it's release, just as with the PT..... box office take and Oscar's don't change that.... GL has said it in interviews..... so have the actors..... the reviews I posted up there, while somewhat positive, called the script corney...... the same critique we're hearing for the PT.....

I thought it was obvious that the close-up clone troopers were CG. They were well done, but having some 'real' troopers for close-ups would have been nice. It worked in the OT.

I also don't look at the OT and PT in different ways.
Well, I do of course, because I'm not 10 anymore, but I can also see the flaws in the OT.
I don't use different standards. I simply, honestly think that the prequels are nowhere near as good as the originals, and I can come up with some pretty good reasons for that.

And as for the idiot who wrote that comment (it was the AotC review from Entertainment Weekly), she proved herself a fool. She wasn't talking about feeling no drama because she knew the ultimate outcome. But that Episode II held no drama as a stand alone movie unless you knew about Episodes IV-VI. This reviewer demonstrated her own ignorance by not recognizing that Anakin's fall to the Dark Side is the entire point of the prequels.

- Or maybe you didn't get the point she was trying to make.
I know Anakin's fall to the dark side is the point of the prequels, but there are huge parts in AOTC that are just there because it has to lead up to the OT. Parts that have nothing to do with the rest of the story of AOTC.
You can't just look at AOTC as one step in a saga. It is one movie, and it should work as a movie. Without a good story in that one movie all you have is a bunch of events that have to be shown in order to lead up to a next episode. Boring.

So unless you have seen the OT the PT doesn't really work.
So it's a very good thing people talk about an OT and a PT instead of one Star Wars story.
I know Lucas has said that he wants these movies to be watched 1-6, but they simply don't work that way. He's made sure they don't.
Besides, I see the PT as part of the EU. The OT works just fine without the PT. The PT doesn't work without the OT.

I can go into detail but for now I'll give this quote from Terry Rossio, a well known and accomplished screenwriter:

We have to trust that the filmmakers are showing us a freight train barreling toward our main story, and that eventually there will be a collision.
Ah, but with great power comes the potential for great fallibility.
The Storyteller cut is where a filmmaker (or beginning screenwriter) can really lose an audience.
Compare the first STAR WARS film (A NEW HOPE) with the latest as of this writing (ATTACK OF THE CLONES). The first movie, I'd argue, leans mostly on situational, storyline-type cuts (this-leads-to-this-leads-to-that) which create momentum, interest, and can be followed with clarity. The latter film, I argue, is full of Storyteller-type cuts, and in some cases, not very good ones ('please watch this scene because it will be important later. Now watch this other scene because it also will be important later. Look, they're falling in love, that's going to be important later. Look, they're falling even more in love and now talking about stuff that is for sure going to be important later...')
There's a limit to how much non-situation delivered information an audience can hold, how many Storyteller or 'set-up' type scenes they can endure -- before they start to feel the story has lost momentum, and is stagnant.
Again, this isn't to say that Storyteller cuts are by nature bad. Just the opposite -- they're crucial. - Terry Rossio - www.wordplayer.com collumn nr. 45

Please leave Oscar nominations out of the arguement.... the Oscars are such crap....

oscars are crap. Critics are biased. Pop culture degrades our perception of what a good film is. Box office means nothing.

Gushers, please. These are excuses! Excuses and nothing more!

An oscar isn't worth anything? A critical review is meaningless?

I'm sure that you feel that way in your hearts and to the SW fan, nothing will shake their steadfast support for George and his movies.

but those lists that were provided tell a story. The story is that despite the "campy overtones" of the OT, it is still loved. Oscars recognize this. AFI recognizes this. I read somewhere that a critic's list ranked ESB as the second or third greatest sequel of all time behind Godfather II and another film.

Is there ANY embrace of the PT in such a manner by the "outsiders" (critics, general public, award nominating committees)?

oscars are crap. Critics are biased. Pop culture degrades our perception of what a good film is. Box office means nothing.

Gushers, please. These are excuses! Excuses and nothing more!

An oscar isn't worth anything? A critical review is meaningless?

I'm sure that you feel that way in your hearts and to the SW fan, nothing will shake their steadfast support for George and his movies.

but those lists that were provided tell a story. The story is that despite the "campy overtones" of the OT, it is still loved. Oscars recognize this. AFI recognizes this. I read somewhere that a critic's list ranked ESB as the second or third greatest sequel of all time behind Godfather II and another film.

Is there ANY embrace of the PT in such a manner by the "outsiders" (critics, general public, award nominating committees)?

You want to know why there are those that don't care about the Oscars? For me it's because a movie I really liked call Saving Private Rayn was snubed by the Oscars. You want to know why I don't care for Adjusted gross.

32 Independence Day $422,471,535

66 The Fellowship of the Ring $331,149,260

So ID4 is more well liked then FOTR. That's what the adjusted gross argument. Is

63 Twister $333,525,106
I guess Twister is a better and more like movie then FOTR to. As for Pop culture when was the last time there was anything good on MTV or ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS.

Box office grosses, Awards and Reviews aside, I just think the OT movies are so much better than the prequels. Any flaws that exist in the OT are 10X more apparent in TPM and AOTC. The movie looks like crap now, it's going to look like crap 10 years from now. I don't overlook the flaws in the OT. I still cringe everytime I see the ewoks in ROTJ to this day. This isn't some double-standard BS that some people on this thread seem to be paranoid about. Jar Jar, eopie farting, and Jake Lloyd was a helluva a lot worse than the ewoks.

It doesn't take away from the fact that each Star Wars movie has been less and less popular. While another franchise, one that is forbidden to be mentioned here, is gaining popularity with each sequel.